Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-08-2019, 04:55 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,353

Can the D's get 50 Senate seats?


I don't know the answer to the question in the title, but thought to post a list of the 34 Senate races in 2020 here to help visualize exactly what's needed to get to 50.

Democrat, sure thing, all popular incumbents
DE Coons
IL Durbin
MA Markey
NJ Booker -- if Booker runs for higher office, will Ds still have a lock?
OR Merkley
RI Reed


Democrat incumbent, victory most probable
NH Shaheen
NM (Udall retiring)
VA Warner
MI Peters - first-termer in danger?
MN Smith - first-termer in danger?


Two seats occupied by Rs whom Ds may be favored to upset.
AZ McSally (unelected) -- Mark Kelly plans to run against her. Must win for the Ds!
CO Gardner (1st term) -- who should Ds run against him?


To win 50 seats the Ds need to win all the above races AND two (2) from The critical Eleven races, shown in pink. I've tried to sort them very roughly by decreasing likelihood of D victory.

If AZ or CO is lost, the D's need 3 seats from the following sub-list of 11, but the D's are underdogs in each case.
NC Tillis
ME Collins (has the popular woman sullied herself by embracing right-wing lies and hatreds?)
GA Perdue -- is Abrams the only one who can beat him?
AL [Jones -- see note below]
IA Ernst
KS Roberts, retiring
MS Hyde-Smith
KY McConnell
TX Cornyn -- could Beto beat him?
MT Daines
TN Alexander, retiring


Republican, sure thing, almost all popular incumbents
AK Sullivan
AR Cotton
ID Risch
LA Cassidy
NE Sasse
OK Inhofe
SC Graham
SD Rounds
WV Capito
WY open?


To make the seat counting more straightforward, the Alabama seat should be counted as Republican:
SPOILER:
As a lark, spurred by their hero announcing he could kill in broad daylight and still get elected, the Rs ran a child molester for a two-year Senate seat. The D got a whopping 18% of the white evangelical vote! While 80% of the white evangelicals held firm and came out in favor of child molestation this wasn't enough to beat the moral vote. Having learned their lesson, the evangelicals will probably nominate a scumbag who only hits on girls 16+, thus reclaiming their Senate seat.

Sure, we'd like to dream of an Alabama where Jones wins re-election, but for the purpose of the list, Jones is the one incumbent Senator heavily favored NOT to win re-election.
  #2  
Old 06-08-2019, 05:33 AM
Grrr!'s Avatar
Grrr! is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 16,178
McConnell ain't going nowhere. I'd say the same thing about Cornyn too to a lesser degree.
  #3  
Old 06-08-2019, 05:55 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,897
It's possible. I'd guess it's a tossup at this point.
  #4  
Old 06-08-2019, 06:31 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
I'd say the Dems are slight underdogs in the quest for 50 Senators. And no Senate control means that a Dem President would be effectively handcuffed, and the 2022 midterms would likely suck for the Dems.

So winning the Senate is every bit as important for the Dems as winning the Presidency - arguably even more so. Which is why it pisses me off to see Bennet and Bullock and Beto and Hickenlooper running for President.
  #5  
Old 06-08-2019, 07:01 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
Comments on the OP's list:

1) Bump Mark Warner up to the D 'sure thing' list. Running against him is political suicide at this point.

2) Bump MS, TN, and KY down to the R 'sure thing' list.

3) I agree that AL belongs on the pink list. Though if Roy Moore manages to win the GOP nomination, it might be a tossup.
  #6  
Old 06-08-2019, 07:15 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
Getting good candidates in those uphill Senate races is the most important thing the Democratic Party can do in 2019. (Even more important than impeachment, and as you guys know, I'm extremely pro-impeachment.)

CO - Hickenlooper, give up the Presidential run, dude
MT - Ditto for you, Bullock
AL - Jones, obviously
GA - sure would be nice if Abrams reconsidered
TX - not sure Beto's even a good Senate candidate anymore; how does MJ Hegar look?
ME - Collins' favorability has taken a nosedive since last year; need a candidate though
IA - Dems beat R's in House vote last November. Again, do they have a candidate?
KS - seems to be returning to semblance of sanity at last. But same refrain.
NC - don't know NC politics at all, would like to hear LHoD's take.
  #7  
Old 06-08-2019, 07:21 AM
Lord Feldon's Avatar
Lord Feldon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 6,373
I'd like to see Steve Bullock run for the Senate, but he's been pretty clear that he has no desire to be in any legislative body anywhere, regardless of what happens to his presidential campaign, so I don't think that's going to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
3) I agree that AL belongs on the pink list. Though if Roy Moore manages to win the GOP nomination, it might be a tossup.
I'm not sure I'd even rate it as a tossup in that case. If Trump had been on the ballot in December 2017, I think Roy Moore would be a senator today.

Last edited by Lord Feldon; 06-08-2019 at 07:26 AM.
  #8  
Old 06-08-2019, 07:58 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,353
(I'll respond to input and revise the list occasionally, while keeping the original colors to minimize confusion.)

Democrat, sure thing, all popular incumbents
DE Coons
IL Durbin
MA Markey
NJ Booker -- if Booker runs for higher office, will Ds still have a lock?
OR Merkley
RI Reed

VA Warner


Democrat incumbent, victory most probable
NH Shaheen
NM (Udall retiring)
MI Peters - first-termer in danger?
MN Smith - first-termer in danger?


Two seats occupied by Rs whom Ds may be favored to upset.
AZ McSally (unelected) -- Mark Kelly plans to run against her. Must win for the Ds!
CO Gardner (1st term) -- @ Hickenlooper: Please run!


To win 50 seats the Ds need to win all the above races AND two (2) from The critical Eight races, shown in pink. I've tried to sort them very roughly by decreasing likelihood of D victory.

If AZ or CO is lost, the D's need 3 seats from the following sub-list of 8, but the D's are underdogs in each case.
NC Tillis
ME Collins (has the popular woman sullied herself by embracing right-wing lies and hatreds?)
GA Perdue -- is Abrams the only one who can beat him?
AL [Jones -- see note below]
IA Ernst
KS Roberts, retiring
MT Daines -- hope Bullock changes his mind and runs
TX Cornyn -- can anyone beat him?


Republican, sure thing, almost all popular incumbents
MS Hyde-Smith
KY McConnell
TN Alexander, retiring

AK Sullivan
AR Cotton
ID Risch
LA Cassidy
NE Sasse
OK Inhofe
SC Graham
SD Rounds
WV Capito
WY open?
  #9  
Old 06-08-2019, 08:52 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,947
Hard to see how anyone could look at that list and conclude "it's a tossup" or that "the Dems are slight underdogs" ... it's a freakin long shot. Inside straight level.

Planets need to align just right.

First there needs to be strong candidates and many of the best possibilities have thrown their hats into no chance presidential runs instead, or just said no.

Then the candiates need to run great campaigns preferably coupled with missteps by the opposition.

And you need a blow-out in the presidential race with the D nominee spending some time in the key states of that list. No chance without coattails.

Meanwhile MI is now a bit less probable with a strong R candidate in the race.

And while NC looks very promising right now, ME is a bit less so.

Assuming wins of all of "most probable" and "favored to upset" and in both NC and ME, a real good run if that, far from "a toss-up", which of the next races are looking as other than very very unlikely to win? Best chance in Iowa is the recently announced Greenfield, who is best known "for her botched campaign for the state's third district in 2018" ...

The fact that losing the Senate again is so likely and that pulling off an upset there requires, among other things, a presidential race blow-out, is yet another reason why having the strongest possible presidential nominee matters even more.
  #10  
Old 06-08-2019, 09:12 AM
Paul in Qatar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia
Posts: 12,685
Not if the hotshots who could win a Senate seat continue to run for the White House.
__________________
800-237-5055
Shrine Hospitals for Children (North America)
Never any fee
Do you know a child in need?
  #11  
Old 06-08-2019, 09:19 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,633
Cornyn is a sure thing. There's no way he loses.

I will say this: Kentucky's Senate race could be very interesting. I don't think McConnell loses outright, but Matt Jones is a formidable opponent, assuming he actually does run. It's also a crucial race for Trump because if the economy starts to sag, McConnell will do what he can to a) save his own ass first, and b) save the Senate majority, which would mean putting distance between himself and Trump.
  #12  
Old 06-08-2019, 09:33 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,265
Alabama belongs in the red group. It took a miracle for Jones to pick up that seat, and it'd take another miracle for him to hold it. And don't say "incumbency advantage": That's mostly just because people are consistent, and so the same people who liked a candidate enough to elect him once will like him enough to elect him again. Jones didn't win because the people liked him; they just disliked Moore more, and he won't be running this time.

As for all of the Presidential candidates who should be running for the Senate instead, there's still time. And it's not like their campaigning now will be wasted if and when they do switch.
  #13  
Old 06-08-2019, 09:56 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Alabama belongs in the red group. It took a miracle for Jones to pick up that seat, and it'd take another miracle for him to hold it. And don't say "incumbency advantage": That's mostly just because people are consistent, and so the same people who liked a candidate enough to elect him once will like him enough to elect him again. Jones didn't win because the people liked him; they just disliked Moore more, and he won't be running this time.
Jones ran against a dirty, sleazy old man, and he just barely won. He won't be lucky this time around.
  #14  
Old 06-08-2019, 11:01 AM
Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Jones didn't win because the people liked him; they just disliked Moore more, and he won't be running this time.
Maybe, maybe not. I honestly don't know which to hope for. Moore running might actually Jones a better than average shot at re-election( otherwise I agree he's almost certainly toast ). But Moore running, terrifyingly, would give Moore a better-than-infinitesimal shot at winning himself and I'm not sure I can wish that on the people of Alabama and the nation.

Last edited by Tamerlane; 06-08-2019 at 11:02 AM.
  #15  
Old 06-08-2019, 01:28 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,265
Hm, if Jones has been doing a good job with constituent services, that might help him to do a little better in this election: Not much, not enough to beat an ordinary Republican, but it might be enough against Moore again. Everyone likes the guy who helped them to clear up red tape.

But I have no idea how well he's doing on that. We'd probably need to ask an Alabaman.
  #16  
Old 06-08-2019, 01:33 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
NC - don't know NC politics at all, would like to hear LHoD's take.
Sorry--since 2016, I've tried real hard to get out of the political predictions game.

I will say that there's a lot of energy among progressives I know, and just as importantly there's an intense focus on the nuts and bolts of organizing. But that's anecdotal; I really don't know whether that's a general phenomenon or whether it's just my social group.
  #17  
Old 06-08-2019, 01:36 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,133
Alabama is going to be tough, but if the state continues to double down on hard right politics such as the abortion ban, there might also be a sliver of hope.

Doug Jones will probably have to say things and occasionally vote in ways that will piss off the activist wing of the Democrats, similar to how Joe Manchin survives.

That’s ok, some millennial on Twitter 1500 miles away doesn’t get to vote for the people of Alabama.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42

Last edited by dalej42; 06-08-2019 at 01:36 PM.
  #18  
Old 06-08-2019, 02:36 PM
HMS Irruncible is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Alabama belongs in the red group. It took a miracle for Jones to pick up that seat, and it'd take another miracle for him to hold it.
Yup. Blue Alabama is wishful thinking. Dems should do their best in every race, but they're not gonna take over the Senate in 2020.
  #19  
Old 06-08-2019, 03:39 PM
DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,030
Isn't Roy Moore leading the primary polls in Alabama? you don't need a miracle for an incumbent Jones to beat Moore again.
  #20  
Old 06-08-2019, 03:44 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,353
It seems from the list that persuading Hickenlooper, Bullock and Abrams to run for Senator could be key.

Easily these three running could turn the Senate from 47-53 into 50-50 !

Are there any other top-top names we should consider to get another Senator-gimme? What states does Oprah Winfrey have homes in?
  #21  
Old 06-08-2019, 03:54 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,947
Scenario for a Jones win in AL: Moore runs for the nom, loses, and his ego drives him to launch an independent bid, pulling off enough that Jones beats a more generic Republican. Unlikely but not impossible. And if it happens you heard it here first!
  #22  
Old 06-08-2019, 04:03 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Sorry--since 2016, I've tried real hard to get out of the political predictions game.
Quite reasonable. Given my rather blemished track record in that department, I don't know why I continue to make the occasional prediction, but I apparently can't help myself.

But I was really just wondering what you'd heard from the local news and whatnot about who might run against Tillis. That would be more than I know already.
  #23  
Old 06-08-2019, 04:13 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,265
Just because we'll almost certainly lose Alabama, doesn't mean that we're guaranteed not to win the Senate. There are a lot of other opportunities.
  #24  
Old 06-08-2019, 04:29 PM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 29,818
Yeah, on the predictions section of the 2020 elections, there are 5 tossup or "lean R" states that are in play and are currently held by Republicans. The 5 states are ones that I would have picked had I been forced to pick 5, so it shows that the predictors are not crazily out of sync with the common wisdom. However, I do not know how much they have taken into account voter suppression efforts in two of these states.

I however, would not accept odds of it flipping either way, it's too close to call in my opinion. Too many unknown unknowns. If the predictors are off and there is a systematic shift redward before the election the dems are toast, but the winds could just as easily blow the other way.
  #25  
Old 06-08-2019, 04:54 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Scenario for a Jones win in AL: Moore runs for the nom, loses, and his ego drives him to launch an independent bid, pulling off enough that Jones beats a more generic Republican. Unlikely but not impossible. And if it happens you heard it here first!
Doesn’t Alabama have a sore loser law?
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #26  
Old 06-08-2019, 04:57 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
Isn't Roy Moore leading the primary polls in Alabama? you don't need a miracle for an incumbent Jones to beat Moore again.
Yes, it would still take a miracle. Jones squeaked by in a special election held during Christmas time and that was after a special primary and then a special run off election.

Much easier to whip people up to vote in a general election and the news won’t be all over Moore during a presidential election where we know Alabama is heavily Trump.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #27  
Old 06-08-2019, 05:03 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Doesn’t Alabama have a sore loser law?
Quick search and yes but it wouldn't prevent a write in campaign.
Quote:
Alabama does have a "sore loser" law that prevents primary losers from making a second run in the same election as an independent. However, Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill has told several news outlets that the law applies only to names printed on the ballot ...

... "There are no existing stipulations that prohibit a candidate from being elected despite having unsuccessfully run for a party’s nomination, which would normally apply due to Alabama’s sore loser law," the Alabama secretary of state said in a statement. ...
  #28  
Old 06-08-2019, 05:04 PM
enipla is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,220
I never thought I would say this, but any vote for any republican labels you as a traitor to the United States. Republicans need to be shown that things like Trump simply will not be tolerated. I believe the only way to do that is to send a very, very strong message. I don't care if you're running for County Clerk or Judge or Senate or House or Dog Catcher. Remove all of them.

Every last one of them.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #29  
Old 06-08-2019, 05:09 PM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Chicago
Posts: 178
Keep in mind that if a miracle occurs and the Dems somehow eke out 50 Senators alongside a Dem VP, Joe Manchin would then likely flip to the R side just as he flirted with doing in 2010 and 2014.

Face it, McConnell is there to stay, and since he is Lawful Evil to Trump's Chaotic Evil, things won't improve much at all when the next president gets sworn in.
  #30  
Old 06-08-2019, 06:38 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Doesn’t Alabama have a sore loser law?
Yes. A look at it in the context of Moore's last run when the state GOP was looking at pulling his nomination includes this:
Quote:
the state’s “sore loser” law passed in 2006 specifies that a candidate who was officially in the primary ballot after the 76-day cutoff “may not thereafter appear on a subsequent ballot representing any other party, or as an independent candidate, or as a minor-party candidate.”
  #31  
Old 06-08-2019, 06:57 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,947
Correct. But can be a write in candidate. See post 27.
  #32  
Old 06-08-2019, 07:47 PM
Ulf the Unwashed is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,376
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Quite reasonable. Given my rather blemished track record in that department, I don't know why I continue to make the occasional prediction, but I apparently can't help myself.

But I was really just wondering what you'd heard from the local news and whatnot about who might run against Tillis. That would be more than I know already.
According to electoral-vote.com, a poll matching Tillis in a hypothetical run with a state senator named Erica Smith had Tillis behind by 46-39.

See https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp20...05.html#item-9.

Disclaimers: I have no idea who Erica Smith is (I don't live in NC), other than this one mention, and no idea whether she has any intention of running; and of course it's early, early, early. So I don't know that I would take it too seriously. Still, for a sitting senator to be underwater against a theoretical opponent in a state that leans toward his political party...well, it ain't nothing.

Which leads me to add that it isn;t necessarily a killer blow if well-known people like Hickenlooper or O'Rourke decline to run against the incumbents. Obviously it's great if you can get a big and popular name to enter the race. OTOH, Bredesen in TN last year didn;t come close to beating the non-incumbent GOP candidate Blackburn (in a race that many felt was very winnable), and who had heard of Stacy Abrams before she nearly won the governor's race in GA? The Collinses and Gardners and Ernsts of the Senate may not be challenged by folks we've heard of at this point; doesn't mean the race will be a guaranteed loser.
  #33  
Old 06-08-2019, 09:25 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,269
Assuming that your groupings are 95% chance to go D, 72.5% chance, 50% chance, 27.5% chance, and 5% chance, the average result that I get is 20.6 Republicans and 14.4 Democrats.

Not impossible, but far from certain.

I guess, in a sense, having more people on one side at the start isn't necessarily helpful to that side. Even if most of them are more likely to maintain their seat, there's still more of them to lose their seat.

Regression towards the mean.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 06-08-2019 at 09:26 PM.
  #34  
Old 06-08-2019, 10:30 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Assuming that your groupings are 95% chance to go D, 72.5% chance, 50% chance, 27.5% chance, and 5% chance, the average result that I get is 20.6 Republicans and 14.4 Democrats.
That's 35.

Also, these aren't independent results: national factors will affect multiple races in similar ways. But that's just a quibble.

Quibbles aside, how does your analysis leave the Senate after the election? How many D, how many R in total?
  #35  
Old 06-08-2019, 11:05 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
That's 35.

Also, these aren't independent results: national factors will affect multiple races in similar ways. But that's just a quibble.

Quibbles aside, how does your analysis leave the Senate after the election? How many D, how many R in total?
Hm...as you say, there should be 34 openings not 35.

...

Looks like I miscounted the solid Ds. I counted eight instead of seven, accidentally. That puts it pretty solidly down as 20.5 to 13.5.

Certainly, this is all a crap analysis. Now that I've looked up the better numbers on Wikipedia, I could probably do something better but, with the current setup, we would expect 51 or 52 seats for Republicans, 46 or 47 for Democrats, and 2 Independents (Sanders and King).

Basically, I would suggest frying sausages for the Crocodile God, wishing that Trump wrecks the economy.
  #36  
Old 06-09-2019, 01:38 AM
D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
I never thought I would say this, but any vote for any republican labels you as a traitor to the United States. Republicans need to be shown that things like Trump simply will not be tolerated. I believe the only way to do that is to send a very, very strong message. I don't care if you're running for County Clerk or Judge or Senate or House or Dog Catcher. Remove all of them.

Every last one of them.
Thanks for a completely rational post.
  #37  
Old 06-09-2019, 02:26 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 21,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
Thanks for a completely rational post.
Back when the American colonies were near to seceding from Britain, Samuel Adams was (probably) one of the crazy hotheads who ran around, dressing like a Native American, setting things on fire, and throwing stuff into the ocean, because he had decided that he just couldn't stand the Brits and how they treated the Americans.*

His cousin John was a lot more cool-headed and reasonable and, I assume, to some extent looked at Samuel and had to restrain his inner facepalm as the guy ran around spouting off crazy nonsense. But that didn't mean that John didn't, at the base of things, agree with Sam about the British and the need to secede. He just thought that there were better ways to go about it that were more productive than Sam was getting up to.

But so, yes, enipla's post is a bit overwrought.

At this moment in time, though, I'm loath to say that I basically have to agree with him. The President has significantly and continuously broken his oath of office, in multiple and varied ways. And while the Democrats have ignored most of them, that's because they're sort of stupid and fixated on Collusion. But the Republicans really have no excuse. They're harboring a person who cheered for other countries to attack our own, who stole from American vets, who jokes about trying to become President for Life, who considered trading away the country and people of Montenegro to Russia in exchange for a deal with North Korea, who orders his people regularly to break rather than preserve the laws of our nation...and I could go on for a while, before even getting to the things we only believe he's probably guilty of as well. Those are all things we already know to be true.

The Republicans of today are despicable and, so far as I am concerned, a person is just as much a traitor to our nation if he has rejected our Constitution, its laws, and the oaths within it as if he decided to work for a foreign nation.

Today, any Republicans who support Donald Trump - which is almost all of them - are, as silly as it may sound to say, just a bunch of traitors to the flag and deserve to be treated with scorn and disgust at every turn.

* Not necessarily an accurate depiction.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 06-09-2019 at 02:29 AM.
  #38  
Old 06-09-2019, 02:39 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla
I never thought I would say this, but any vote for any republican labels you as a traitor to the United States. Republicans need to be shown that things like Trump simply will not be tolerated. I believe the only way to do that is to send a very, very strong message. I don't care if you're running for County Clerk or Judge or Senate or House or Dog Catcher. Remove all of them.

Every last one of them.
Thanks for a completely rational post.
IIRC, I don't often agree with D'Anconia. But I do here.
  #39  
Old 06-09-2019, 07:40 AM
enipla is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
IIRC, I don't often agree with D'Anconia. But I do here.
I believe that Trump is at least in the colloquial, a traitor. We are not at war with Russia, so the constitutional 'giving aid and comfort to the enemy may not apply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by USLegal.com
Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution declares, that adhering to the enemies of the United States, giving them aid and comfort, shall be treason. Any act that deliberately strengthens or tends to strengthen enemies of United States or that weakens or tends to weaken the power of United States to resist and attack such enemies is characterized as aid and comfort.
I firmly believe that Trump and his team willing accepted help from Russia. To what end? That's difficult to nail down. Russia clearly wanted Trump to become President. Possibly because they know he's basically a fuck up. Possibly for favors in return and or that they have compromising info on him in the form of embarrassing stunts, or simply that he's on the hook for a lot of money. Everyone has to decide for themselves it that should be considered treason. I do.

I call supporting a person that acts in such a way treasonous. Sure, there are republicans that don't support Trump. And may find them in his tent by these unfortunate events. They can either denounce Trump, leave the tent or get voted out. A message must be sent. This shit should not be tolerated. YMMV.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #40  
Old 06-09-2019, 08:50 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
Trump and the GOP are traitors on a far wider scale than just this country.

They have been nearly unanimous for decades in their opposition to doing anything about climate change, usually denying its very existence. And now, as the shit is hitting the fan, they haven't changed a bit. Here's Trump blocking written testimony from the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research outlining the catastrophic threat climate change poses - one whose effects, as the story at the link notes, our military is already preparing for.

ETA: The Bureau of Intelligence and Research was the intel agency that got Iraq right.

Last edited by RTFirefly; 06-09-2019 at 08:54 AM.
  #41  
Old 06-09-2019, 09:56 AM
enipla is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Trump and the GOP are traitors on a far wider scale than just this country.

They have been nearly unanimous for decades in their opposition to doing anything about climate change, usually denying its very existence. And now, as the shit is hitting the fan, they haven't changed a bit. Here's Trump blocking written testimony from the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research outlining the catastrophic threat climate change poses - one whose effects, as the story at the link notes, our military is already preparing for.

ETA: The Bureau of Intelligence and Research was the intel agency that got Iraq right.
Just like the economy, he will be dead before it harms him. It's somebody else's problem. He has stated as much. What a guy.

All the while, the senate is just kicking the can down the road. They've got theirs after all, why should they worry?

And these assholes have convinced those of... lesser means... to support them, because, "Don't worry, we are really on your side"

Are they deplorable as Hillary stated? Sure, that exists on both sides. I'll just call Trump's base easily manipulated. That's the kindest thing I can do.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #42  
Old 06-09-2019, 10:05 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
It needs to be said: the GOP's intransigence with respect to global warming is likely an existential threat to a significant portion of the human race.

If we do nothing about it, then there will be droughts, there will be famines, there will be island and coastal flooding, there will be storms, all of a quantity and severity this generation has never seen. The human race will surely survive, but the number of people this planet can support will be reduced.

The Republican Party is, quite simply, traitors to the human race. This should be shouted from the rooftops.
  #43  
Old 06-09-2019, 12:19 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 83,265
Quote:
Quoth enipla:

I believe that Trump is at least in the colloquial, a traitor. We are not at war with Russia...
Russia says that we are.
  #44  
Old 06-09-2019, 01:21 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,742
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
I believe that Trump is at least in the colloquial, a traitor. We are not at war with Russia, so the constitutional 'giving aid and comfort to the enemy may not apply.
JFTR, 'being a traitor' and 'having committed treason' are two different things. The latter implies the former, but not vice versa.

Treason is a specific crime which (as you say) is mentioned in the Constitution.

A traitor is someone who betrays, and betrayal isn't a crime in and of itself. To cite the most infamous instance of betrayal, Judas committed no crime when he betrayed Jesus.
  #45  
Old 06-09-2019, 03:20 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
... wishing that Trump wrecks the economy.
That's an ugly thing to wish for, even if you perceive it will bring you some political advantage.
  #46  
Old 06-09-2019, 03:58 PM
enipla is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
That's an ugly thing to wish for, even if you perceive it will bring you some political advantage.
I doubt very much that is what Sage Rat was saying. And this has fuck all to do with political advantage. It has everything to do with people that support a criminal.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #47  
Old 06-09-2019, 04:50 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
... I'll just call Trump's base easily manipulated. That's the kindest thing I can do.
If they are so easily manipulated, why haven't you manipulated them into not supporting President Trump yet?
  #48  
Old 06-09-2019, 05:05 PM
enipla is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
If they are so easily manipulated, why haven't you manipulated them into not supporting President Trump yet?
Troll along HD. Your bullshit is not worth responding to.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
  #49  
Old 06-09-2019, 05:43 PM
sps49sd is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by enipla View Post
Troll along HD. Your bullshit is not worth responding to.
His bullshit should be taken as a check on your wishful thinking.

But go ahead. How about you (and RTFirefly) shout from the rooftops, instead of wishing someone else will do it for you?
  #50  
Old 06-09-2019, 05:48 PM
enipla is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Colorado Rockies.
Posts: 14,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
His bullshit should be taken as a check on your wishful thinking.

But go ahead. How about you (and RTFirefly) shout from the rooftops, instead of wishing someone else will do it for you?
Neither you or HD will shout from the rooftops as you are happy to have a moron for a president. I will vote. That worked until republicans accepted and invited foreign countries to play with our elections. My shouting is done from here. For now.
__________________
I don't live in the middle of nowhere, but I can see it from here.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017